United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
STEPHANIE K. BOWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
an inmate in custody at the North Central Correctional
Institution at the time this action was commenced, has filed
a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in this Court. (Doc.
1). This matter is before the Court on respondent's
motion to dismiss, to which petitioner has not responded.
reasons stated below, the undersigned recommends that
respondent's motion to dismiss be granted (Doc. 5) and
the petition be dismissed.
petition, petitioner raises the following single ground for
habeas corpus relief:
Due Process of law Amendment 14th, §
2929.19(B)(2)(g)(i), (B)(2)(g)(ii), (B)(2)(g)(ii), §
Supporting facts: I did send exhibits to the court to verify
my incarceration in the County Jail of Hamilton county Jail
attach to my motion.
(Doc. 1 at PageID 6). For relief, petitioner requests that
jail time be credited to him to reduce his sentence and that
he be immediately released. (Id. at PageID 16).
Respondent has moved to dismiss the petition for lack of
jurisdiction, as moot, for failure to comply with Habeas Rule
2, on exhaustion grounds, and for failure to state a
cognizable claim for relief in federal habeas corpus. (Doc.
March 15, 2018, following a bench trial, petitioner was found
guilty of Failure to Register and Comply with Sex Offender
Registration Duties and sentenced to 18 months in the Ohio
Department of Corrections. (Doc. 4, Ex. 11). Petitioner was
also found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to serve
sixty-days in the Hamilton County Justice Center.
August 6, 2018, petitioner filed a pro se motion for
jail-time credit, which was denied by the trial court. (Doc.
4, Ex. 22, 23). On November 5, 2018, the trial court filed a
nunc pro tunc sentencing entry granting petitioner
120 days of jail time credit. (Doc. 4, Ex. 24).
February 19, 2019, petitioner filed another motion for jail
time credit, which remained pending when petitioner filed the
instant habeas corpus petition. As he does in the petition,
petitioner claimed he was entitled to jail-time credit under
Ohio Rev. Code § 2929.19. (Doc. 4, Ex. 25). On March 18,
2019, the trial court issued an order granting
petitioner's motion. (Doc. 4, Ex. 26). Petitioner was
released from custody the next day, on March 19, 2019. (Doc.
4, Ex. 27 at PageID 244-45).
III, § 2 of the United States Constitution limits the
federal judicial power to the adjudication of cases and
controversies. In the context of a habeas corpus petition, a
district court generally lacks jurisdiction over the petition
if the petitioner is not in government custody. Therefore,
except in limited circumstances not applicable to the
case-at-hand,  a petitioner's release from custody
generally moots a habeas petition. See Lane v.
Williams, 455 U.S. 624, 631-32 (1982).
case, petitioner does not attack his conviction. Instead, he
seeks release from custody on the ground that he was entitled
to jail time credits. As noted above, the trial court granted
petitioner's motion for jail-time credit (Doc. 4, Ex. 26)
and petitioner has been released. In the absence of a
remaining case or controversy the undersigned recommends that
the petition be dismissed as moot. See Brantley v.
Sloan, No. 1:16-cv-200, 2017 WL 4326661, at *3 (N.D.
Ohio Feb. 8, 2017) (finding that a petition challenging jail
time credits was rendered moot where the petitioner's
term of incarceration had expired and he was released)
(Report and Recommendation), adopted 2017 WL 4310649
(N.D. Ohio Sept. 28, 2017). Cf. Kahn v. Attorney
General, Case Nos. 1:15-cv-2014, 1:16-cv-85, at *2 (N.D.
Ohio May 17, 2016) (“As Petitioner has ...